The Structural Problems and the Role of the Children and Youth Council of Thailand under the National Child and Youth Development Promotion Act of 2007 and the Second Amendment of 2017

Abstract

This research aimed to 1) examine the laws and mechanisms governing the selection of members of the Children and Youth Council of Thailand and compare the membership selection systems and youth participation mechanisms in the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, and Austria; 2) investigate the problems, obstacles, and limitations related to the roles, powers, duties, and operations of the Children and Youth Council of Thailand; 3) compare the specialized committee mechanisms and organizational structures of youth councils in foreign countries in order to identify appropriate approaches for application to the Thai context; and 4) propose recommendations for improving the National Child and Youth Development Promotion Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended by the Second Amendment B.E. 2560 (2017), as well as related subordinate legislation, to enhance youth participation in public policy and legislative processes. This study employed documentary research and legal analysis. Data were collected from laws, academic publications, textbooks, research studies, theses, official documents, and other relevant domestic and international sources published during the period 2007–2025. The findings revealed that 1) the process for acquiring members of the Children and Youth Council of Thailand lacks clarity, uniformity, and transparency, resulting in inadequate representation of youth diversity when compared with the systems in the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, and Austria, where selection mechanisms are more clearly defined and participatory; 2) the Council’s role in influencing public policy and legislation remains limited due to the absence of legal mechanisms requiring state agencies to formally consider its policy proposals; 3) the Children and Youth Council of Thailand lacks specialized committees, leading to discontinuity in operations and limiting its capacity to effectively address policy issues; and 4) legal reforms should focus on establishing standardized criteria for member selection nationwide, strengthening mechanisms for receiving and monitoring youth proposals, and supporting the establishment of specialized committees within the Council. The key recommendation of this study is to amend both primary and subordinate legislation to create institutional mechanisms that systematically connect youth proposals with public policy formulation and legislative processes.